TexasCHLforum.com

Redneck_Buddha wrote:1,000 rounds of 9, 1,000 rounds of .45, 500 rounds of Wby .270, 500 rounds of 12 gauge 00. I'm good for a bit.

cprems wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

cprems wrote:I don't believe there will be an ammo shortage. The markup for those who were waiting in line to sell it, isn't there!

Those who rushed out and bought post Sandy hook, have been sitting on their stash and waiting!

I don't foresee a panic gun buy either. Again, sandy hook took care of that need.

Maybe, maybe not.....that assumes that every potential new buyer bought back then and no one has since considered, and ignores purchases for speculation of guns, not just ammo. It also depends on what legislation is proposed and how much media propaganda supports it. After Sandy Hook the talk was mostly of prospective bans and registration of existing guns, like in New York. Remember the refrain was no one wants to take your guns....a transparent lie but invoked routinely. Now they're openly calling for confiscation. A bill introduced to confiscate ARs and AKs might well clear the shelves of both guns and ammo in the respective calibers.

I'm not saying it won't happen but this time we have both the Senate and House. Trying to pass some kind of gun bill after a terrorist attack will be the political death of anyone touching it. Americans are very uneasy right now especially with the failure to act coming from this WH and administration. If one cannot identify the enemy, one cannot engage in a manner to secure the homeland and the freedoms we have.

It's like AA, the WH has to admit there is a problem first...

cprems wrote:I don't believe there will be an ammo shortage. The markup for those who were waiting in line to sell it, isn't there!

Those who rushed out and bought post Sandy hook, have been sitting on their stash and waiting!

I don't foresee a panic gun buy either. Again, sandy hook took care of that need.

Opponents of gun control are saying, as they do after every killing, that no law can unfailingly forestall a specific criminal. That is true. They are talking, many with sincerity, about the constitutional challenges to effective gun regulation. Those challenges exist. They point out that determined killers obtained weapons illegally in places like France, England and Norway that have strict gun laws. Yes, they did.

But at least those countries are trying. The United States is not. Worse, politicians abet would-be killers by creating gun markets for them, and voters allow those politicians to keep their jobs. It is past time to stop talking about halting the spread of firearms, and instead to reduce their number drastically — eliminating some large categories of weapons and ammunition.

Bluevoter San Francisco 7 hours ago

I respect your right, too, but you don't need an automatic weapon nor a cartridge that can hold 50 bullets in order to defend your family.

Rev. Jim Bridges Arlington, WA 7 hours ago

I'm terrified to live in a nation that respects your right to defend your family, your home, and your personhood, but also grants you the ability on a whim to kill my family, detroy my home, and kill me for no reason whatsoever. I submit that what you describe is not freedom; it is insanity.

Susan Taylor London 6 hours ago

The subtext of your comment is that the problem here is terrorism by extremist Muslims. But one could argue quite forcefully that the pervasiveness of guns of all types in the US is terrorism. When I see a civilian carrying a gun in an "open carry" state, such as Tennessee, where I have a home, I am filled with terror.